Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorDeil-Amen, Reginaen
dc.contributor.authorSugiyama-Murray, Enid T.
dc.creatorSugiyama-Murray, Enid T.en
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-14T19:11:00Z
dc.date.available2017-06-14T19:11:00Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/624157
dc.description.abstractThis study examined the institutional and governmental forces that contributed to the passage of community college baccalaureate (CCB) legislation, and the plans for future implementation of a CCB within differing state contexts. The analysis of governmental and institutional actors was conducted through the lens of institutional theory, state relative autonomy theory, resource dependency theory, and coalition framework theory, in order to determine how those interactions affected policy change at community colleges. The three most significant findings were the universities’ perception of community colleges as competitors, policy entrepreneurship, and the importance of coalition building. First, the scarcity of state funding, students, and other resources prompted the universities to act more as competitors or opponents than partners. In turn, community colleges, responding to the lack of access by the universities, turned to themselves to provide the baccalaureate, which incensed universities because they saw the CCB not only as an infringement on their turf but as a competitive threat. Second, successful states that were able to pass CCB legislation, had policy entrepreneurs who were instrumental in changing the status quo and promoting innovation. Policy entrepreneurs in this study built networks and coalitions of powerful people who could execute their plan and influence policy change. Finally, although the policy entrepreneur was a critical factor in policy change, the true power lay in the base, or the coalitions and networks of people who shared the same beliefs. Without a true collective movement, even with powerful and invested policy entrepreneurs and stakeholders, the legislation could not pass.
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en
dc.subjectBaccalaureateen
dc.subjectCollegeen
dc.subjectCommunityen
dc.titleIt Takes a Village...A Study of the Community College Baccalaureate Movement in Four Statesen_US
dc.typetexten
dc.typeElectronic Dissertationen
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen
dc.contributor.committeememberDeil-Amen, Reginaen
dc.contributor.committeememberLee, Jennyen
dc.contributor.committeememberRhoades, Garyen
dc.description.releaseDissertation not available (per author's request)
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen
thesis.degree.disciplineHigher Educationen
thesis.degree.namePh.D.en
html.description.abstractThis study examined the institutional and governmental forces that contributed to the passage of community college baccalaureate (CCB) legislation, and the plans for future implementation of a CCB within differing state contexts. The analysis of governmental and institutional actors was conducted through the lens of institutional theory, state relative autonomy theory, resource dependency theory, and coalition framework theory, in order to determine how those interactions affected policy change at community colleges. The three most significant findings were the universities’ perception of community colleges as competitors, policy entrepreneurship, and the importance of coalition building. First, the scarcity of state funding, students, and other resources prompted the universities to act more as competitors or opponents than partners. In turn, community colleges, responding to the lack of access by the universities, turned to themselves to provide the baccalaureate, which incensed universities because they saw the CCB not only as an infringement on their turf but as a competitive threat. Second, successful states that were able to pass CCB legislation, had policy entrepreneurs who were instrumental in changing the status quo and promoting innovation. Policy entrepreneurs in this study built networks and coalitions of powerful people who could execute their plan and influence policy change. Finally, although the policy entrepreneur was a critical factor in policy change, the true power lay in the base, or the coalitions and networks of people who shared the same beliefs. Without a true collective movement, even with powerful and invested policy entrepreneurs and stakeholders, the legislation could not pass.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
azu_etd_15170_sip1_m.pdf
Size:
1.260Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Dissertation not available through ...

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record